On 2017-08-10 22:32, Kurt Seifried wrote:
> Please keep the git running, submitting in volume is a real pain
> otherwise.
> Does the Board agree with this approach? Additionally, Do any
> Board members have any suggestions or thoughts on what the next phase
> plan should include?____
I plan to collect some more input internally, but:
1. API access, does the CoDev/Bitbucket API resemble Github, and what
would API submissions mean?
2. Branches vs. Forks. I am far from a git expert, but I'm told that
git-using CNAs should perhaps all have forks.
3. Official branches. Could have e.g. stable and fast branches, fast
branch changes get merged into stable, a consumer can select fast at
the expense of more changes.
4. I share with Harold and perhaps others the idea that a consumer
would want to search a particular CNA's entries. This might lead to a
completely separate, non-git experiment. Would CNAs hosting public git
repos (possibly forks of the main repo) address the search issue? Or
would some sort of API be necessary?
- Art